[Bug 225671] Merge Review: curl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: curl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225671 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review- |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 02:30 EST --- Approving the review by setting the fedora-review flag. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445501] Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445501 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 04:06 EST --- rpmlint is clean. Requires: rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1 rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1 rpmlib(VersionedDependencies) = 3.0.3-1 libaugeas.so.0()(64bit) libc.so.6()(64bit) libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit) ocaml(Callback) = e5ca1fb5990fac2b7b17cbb1712cffe2 ocaml(Pervasives) = 8ba3d1faa24d659525c9025f41fd0c57 ocaml(runtime) = 3.10.0 Provides: dllmlaugeas.so()(64bit) ocaml(Augeas) = 03863c2006cbc18d8007602c209b6668 ocaml-augeas = 0.4-1.fc8 Files in the main package: /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/META /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/augeas.cmi /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/mlaugeas.cma /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllmlaugeas.so /usr/lib64/ocaml/stublibs/dllmlaugeas.so.owner /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-0.4 /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-0.4/COPYING.LIB Files in the -devel subpackage: /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/augeas.cmx /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/augeas.mli /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/libmlaugeas.a /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/mlaugeas.a /usr/lib64/ocaml/augeas/mlaugeas.cmxa /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4 /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/Augeas.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_attributes.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_class_types.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_classes.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_exceptions.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_methods.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_module_types.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_modules.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_types.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/index_values.html /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/style.css /usr/share/doc/ocaml-augeas-devel-0.4/html/type_Augeas.html -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444952] Review Request: tlock - terminal lock
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tlock - terminal lock https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444952 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 04:20 EST --- Oops...! Really sorry for that. Please see again SPEC: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/tlock.spec SRPM: http://pjp.dgplug.org/tools/tlock-1.1-5.fc8.src.rpm Thank you! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445501] New: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445501 Summary: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-augeas.spec SRPM URL: http://www.annexia.org/tmp/ocaml/ocaml-augeas-0.4-1.fc8.src.rpm Description: OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 442473] Review Request: parcellite - A lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: parcellite - A lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442473 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 05:38 EST --- parcellite-0.7-2.fc8 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 8 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443797] Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Alias: comedilib-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443797 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED] |[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 442473] Review Request: parcellite - A lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: parcellite - A lightweight GTK+ clipboard manager https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=442473 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 05:37 EST --- parcellite-0.7-2.fc9 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 9 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443797] Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Alias: comedilib-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443797 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 05:55 EST --- Thanks for the package, and sorry for the delay. Here's the review: 1.) Source file is not available for download. Probably the correct URL is: http://www.comedi.org/comedi/download/comedilib-0.8.1.tar.gz 2.) You should not use %makeinstall macro. See this document for reason: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#MakeInstall 3.) The build in mock failed for me. Seems like it did not generate python files, and failed to define %python_sitelib correctly. That might be because you omitted python-devel from BuildRequires. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 433219] Review Request: ganyremote - GTK frontend for anyremote
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ganyremote - GTK frontend for anyremote https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433219 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443576] Review Request: monodevelop-boo - boo plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-boo - boo plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443576 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 06:06 EST --- Spec URL: http://pfj.fedorapeople.org/monodevelop-boo.spec SRPM URL: http://pfj.fedorapeople.org/monodevelop-boo-1.0-2.fc9.src.rpm Lots of fixes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443577] Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443577 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443577] Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443577 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 06:31 EST --- Fails to build, configuration script specifically checks for monodevelop = 1.0 which we don't have and the spec check is not versioned. This review must thus block on monodevelop 1.0 inclusion (I'm hoping that does not cause circular dependency issues). You need the standard ExclusiveArch line for Mono apps: ExclusiveArch: %ix86 x86_64 ia64 armv4l sparc alpha ppc As the package contains absolutely no .boo files, I wonder why this requires boo in the first place. If I ask politely will you name the patch after it's function and add comments to your sed magic to make it easier to follow for those of us who maintain your packages lightly while you are away. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444721] Review Request: gtksourceview2-sharp - gtksourceview2 C# binding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview2-sharp - gtksourceview2 C# binding https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444721 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||443576 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443576] Review Request: monodevelop-boo - boo plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-boo - boo plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443576 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||444721 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 06:40 EST --- Thank you but this still doesn't build in mock: No package 'gtksourceview-sharp-2.0' found Setting this review to be blocked by 444721 Aside that I am very happy with the changes you made. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444721] Review Request: gtksourceview2-sharp - gtksourceview2 C# binding
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gtksourceview2-sharp - gtksourceview2 C# binding https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444721 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||443578 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443578] Review Request: monodevelop-database - database plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-database - database plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443578 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||444721 Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 06:57 EST --- Fails to build in mock: autoreconf: command not found Also needs to depend on gtksourceview-sharp-2.0 (blocking on 444721) You need the standard ExclusiveArch line for Mono apps: ExclusiveArch: %ix86 x86_64 ia64 armv4l sparc alpha ppc As the package contains absolutely no .boo files, I wonder why this requires boo in the first place. Tarball contains prebuilt .dll files /contrib/MySql/MySql.Data.dll /contrib/Sqlite/Mono.Data.Sqlite.dll The package doesn't currently build without these however we are not allowed to use prebuilt stuff for security reasons. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443577] Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: monodevelop-java - java plugin for monodevelop https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443577 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 06:39 EST --- Yeah., it'll be down to needing a newer monodevelop than is already there. I'll fix the other stuff up for you as well. Thanks for doing this. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445338] Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-flumpegdemux - MPEG demuxer for GStreamer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gstreamer-plugins-flumpegdemux - MPEG demuxer for GStreamer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445338 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 08:15 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) snip I still can't view the menu's on DVD. I thought totem shoudl now do this. Should I file a bug report? No, it doesn't do menus. It just gives you all the tracks listed in the playlist. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 225671] Merge Review: curl
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Merge Review: curl https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=225671 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 08:48 EST --- Created an attachment (id=304760) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=304760action=view) Patch against devel cvs for minor spec issues Last few nitpicks: 1. _GNU_SOURCE is no longer needed for NI_MAXHOST visibility. 2. Buildreq libtool isn't needed. 3. The CHANGES and README files aren't UTF-8. 4. The x86_64 package has a bogus rpath of /usr/lib64. Attached patch fixes all of these. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445386] Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:01 EST --- BuildRequires: autoconf automake is not required. Everything else seems to be OK. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445410] Review Request: sac - Java standard interface for CSS parser
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: sac - Java standard interface for CSS parser https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445410 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:03 EST --- See this for release numbering: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/JPackagePolicy I'll take this one. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445386] Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445386 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:13 EST --- fixed in: http://people.redhat.com/pvrabec/rpms/librelp-0.1.1-2.fc7.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445386] Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:34 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-activeldap Short Description: LDAP APIs for Ruby Owners: mcpierce Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: none Cvsextras Commits: Yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:35 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-hoe Short Description: Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles Owners: mcpierce Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: none Cvsextras Commits: Yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:36 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: rubygem-rubyforge Short Description: A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations Owners: mcpierce Branches: F-8 F-9 InitialCC: none Cvsextras Commits: Yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445386] Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 09:41 EST --- New Package CVS Request === Package Name: librelp Short Description: Reliable Event Logging Protocol library Owners: theinric Branches: F-9 InitialCC: pvrabec Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445537] New: Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445537 Summary: Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/atkac/tightvnc.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/atkac/tightvnc-1.5.0-0.1.svn2562.fc9.src.rpm Description: Virtual Network Computing (VNC) is a remote display system which allows you to view a computing 'desktop' environment not only on the machine where it is running, but from anywhere on the Internet and from a wide variety of machine architectures -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436568] Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436568
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 10:17 EST ---
(In reply to comment #18)
I would take this (given your comment on what upstream said) that you should
probably go w/ lowercase supybot.
Sure, that sounds good. Here's an updated package with some other fixes as
well. (I was calling rm -rf on %{python_sitelib}/... instead of
%{buildroot}%{python_sitelib}/..., which is obviously bad.)
Now, my main question is how to handle dependencies of plugins. I don't think
supybot should depend on packages that only one plugin requires, so how would I
tell users that they need to install a package to use a certain plugin? Then
again, there are only three small packages that fall under this category:
python-dateutil, python-feedparser, and python-dictclient (under review, bug
#441098), so maybe it wouldn't be horrible to require them either. Any
thoughts?
Spec URL: http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/supybot/supybot.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/supybot/supybot-0.83.3-4.fc9.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs+ -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs+ |fedora-cvs? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444625] Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: GMT-docs - Documentation for Generic Mapping Tools
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444625
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 11:18 EST ---
How about this one:
Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT-docs
SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/GMT-docs-4.3.0-1.src.rpm
* Tue Apr 6 2008 Orion Poplawski [EMAIL PROTECTED] 4.3.0-1
- Update to 4.3.0
- Make single package
Technically, GMT owns %{_docdir}/GMT-%{version}/, so it should require GMT,
though perhaps not a big deal.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 262401] Review Request: jcip-annotations - Java 5 thread safety annotations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: jcip-annotations - Java 5 thread safety annotations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=262401 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436568] Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436568 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 11:33 EST --- I was trying to figure out how to handle the dependencies as well. Subpackages would be the most ideal since they wouldn't pull in unneeded dependencies but might be a good deal of work to maintain (since you'd have to pull out all the plugins separately for the core package). Another dependency we might consider is the Twisted package (python-twisted-core and python-twisted-names needed on F8) since it's necessary for SSL connections. I'm hoping to become a sponsor soon and can help you get this (and the other package) through review; I'll hopefully hear tomorrow after the FESCo meeting. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436568] Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436568 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 11:34 EST --- Created an attachment (id=304773) -- (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=304773action=view) Patch to add macro for origname (case) and fix line length of some items -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 285551] Review Request: idw-gpl - Java Swing based docking windows framework
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: idw-gpl - Java Swing based docking windows framework https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=285551 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Status|NEW |ASSIGNED Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444356] Review Request: bpython - Fancy Curses Interface To The Python Interactive Interpreter
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bpython - Fancy Curses Interface To The Python Interactive Interpreter https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444356 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|ASSIGNED|CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:45 EST --- Common practise appears to leave the bug assigned to the reviewer. I had stale browser cache or something, bug was assigned to Nobody. Anyway, package pending for testing in F-7, F-8 and F-9 now. Thanks for help, Hans and Kevin! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:41 EST ---
From next time please change the EVR (Epoch-Version-Release)
of your spec/srpm every time you modify your spec/srpm to
avoid confusion.
For (2nd) 5.08.91-0:
* License
---
Whole: LGPLv2+
OOps/random.c BSD
Opcodes/Loris/lorisgens5.C GPLv2+
Opcodes/Loris/lorisgens5.h GPLv2+
Opcodes/Loris/morphdemo.py GPLv2+
Opcodes/py/pycall-gen.pyGPLv2+
Opcodes/scansyn.c NON-FREE
Opcodes/scansyn.h NON-FREE
Opcodes/scansynx.c NON-FREE
SDIF/sdif-mem.c MIT
SDIF/sdif-mem.h MIT
SDIF/sdif.c MIT
SDIF/sdif.h MIT
examples/cscore/GPLv2+
frontends/CsoundX/AudioCode/NON-FREE
util/*.{c,h}GPLv2+
util/sortex/GPLv2+
---
- To follow http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines :
* libscansyn.so is non-free and cannot be allowed for Fedora
so please remove this.
* libstdutil.so is under GPLv2+. So the license tag of olpcsound
rpm should be LGPLv2+ and GPLv2+. Also some explanation is
needed on spec file. Please refer to the section
Multiple Licensing Scenarios of LicensingGuidelines wiki.
* Requires
- Requires for -devel subpackage is wrong for now as:
---
$ rpm -qp --requires olpcsound-devel-5.08.91-0.olpc2.i386.rpm
libcsnd.so.5.1
libcsound.so.5.1
olpcsound=5.08.91-0.olpc2
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) = 3.0.4-1
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) = 4.0-1
---
* This shows that -devel subpackage now Requies the rpm
named olpcsound=5.08.91-0.olpc2, not olpcsound with
EVR 5.08.91-0.olpc2.
* Optflags
- Would you explain why you want -ffast-math? This option
changes (reduces) precision and may render debugging difficult.
* Macros
- Use macros properly. For example /usr/bin should be %_bindir.
(by the way why do you want to call scons by full path?)
* Directory ownership issue
- Again please make it sure all directories created when installing
a rpm are owned by the rpm.
* For example, %_libdir/csound is not owned by any package.
* Build working directoryy issue
-
%files -f %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/csound5.lang
-
- %{_builddir}/%{name}-%{version}/ part is redundant because
at this stage the working directory is the directory.
* debuginfo rpm issue
- build.log says:
-
808 + /usr/lib/rpm/find-debuginfo.sh /builddir/build/BUILD/olpcsound-5.08.91
809 extracting debug info from
/var/tmp/olpcsound-5.08.91-0.olpc2-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/libcsound.so.5.1
810 extracting debug info from
/var/tmp/olpcsound-5.08.91-0.olpc2-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/libcsnd.so.5.1
811 extracting debug info from
/var/tmp/olpcsound-5.08.91-0.olpc2-root-mockbuild/usr/lib/python2.5/site-packages/_csnd.so
812 0 blocks
-
This means that these binaries are stripped before %install
stage ends. Make it sure that these binaries are _not_ stripped
to create debuginfo rpm properly.
* Documents
- Please add the following files to %doc.
-
AUTHORS
-
- The file INSTALL is for people who want to build and install
a software by themselves and is not needed for people who use
rpm system.
* rpmlint issue
-
olpcsound.i386: W: file-not-utf8 /usr/share/doc/csound/readme-csound5.txt
olpcsound.i386: E: description-line-too-long olpcsound .
olpcsound.i386: W: no-version-in-last-changelog
-
- Change the encoding of %_docdir/%name/readme-csound5.txt to UTF-8.
- Make it sure that all lines in %desctiption should have less than
80 characters.
- Add EVR info to %changelog
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443248] Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-activeldap - LDAP APIs for Ruby https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443248 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:47 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445386] Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: librelp - Reliable Event Logging Protocol library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445386 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:53 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443249] Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-hoe - Hoe is a simple rake/rubygems helper for project Rakefiles https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443249 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:49 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443250] Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: rubygem-rubyforge - A script which automates a limited set of rubyforge operations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443250 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-cvs? |fedora-cvs+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:50 EST --- cvs done. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 12:59 EST --- I can take care of everything bar this one: *debuginfo rpm issue: the install script strips the binaries. I can change that, but then where do I do the stripping? Should I do it explicitely in the rpm somewhere? Besides, the csound spec (approved by Fedora) does seem to do the same thing, so if it's wrong here it is wrong there too. (That goes also for the ownership of directories. In the approved csound spec, no one owns the %_libdir/csound directory, just the %_libdir/csound/plugins. So it's wrong there too) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 13:10 EST --- (In reply to comment #9) I can take care of everything bar this one: *debuginfo rpm issue: the install script strips the binaries. I can change that, but then where do I do the stripping? Should I do it explicitely in the rpm somewhere? You should _not_ strip those binaries. rpmbuild automatically strips those binaries properly at last. Some explanation is written in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Debuginfo Besides, the csound spec (approved by Fedora) does seem to do the same thing, so if it's wrong here it is wrong there too. I have not checked csound spec file, from your comment csound spec file is also wrong. (That goes also for the ownership of directories. In the approved csound spec, no one owns the %_libdir/csound directory, just the %_libdir/csound/plugins. So it's wrong there too) Same above. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 13:20 EST --- Ok that's easy, just take the strip out of the installer script. Where does it say that rpmbuild does the stripping? I remember seeing that the binary package built without the stripping was about 5 times bigger than the one using the stripping installer (which tells me it was not stripped). But if you say it's done automatically, I am OK with it (but I will check). Someone ought to look at the fedora project csound.spec. I could do it once I get this done and am sponsored. Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444134] Review Request: spe - Python IDE editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: spe - Python IDE editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444134 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 13:39 EST --- New version Bug correction: Spec URL: http://download.berlios.de/python/spe.spec SRPM URL: http://download.berlios.de/python/spe-0.8.4.h-0.2.fc8.src.rpm I search a sponsor Thanks -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 440597] Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: olpcsound - OLPC subset of csound 5 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=440597 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 13:56 EST --- (In reply to comment #11) Ok that's easy, just take the strip out of the installer script. Where does it say that rpmbuild does the stripping? I said this on my comment 8. Or you can check what __spec_install_post does. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445142] Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445142 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 14:58 EST --- Looks good, APPROVED. One small item: move ./autogen.sh to %setup section, not %build -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436568] Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Supybot - Cross-platform IRC bot written in Python
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436568
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 14:58 EST ---
Applied, thanks! The only part that I didn't use were the %{name} substitutions
in the file list (since I don't think those were necessarily semantically
related to the name of the package.)
Spec URL: http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/supybot/supybot.spec
SRPM URL:
http://ricky.fedorapeople.org/pkgs/supybot/supybot-0.83.3-5.fc9.src.rpm
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445142] Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445142 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO|177841 | nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445142] Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libcapseo - Realtime encoding/decoding library https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445142 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 15:14 EST --- Will change that, also for BZ 445143 which has the same build process -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444817] Review Request: Spicebird - Collaboration Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Spicebird - Collaboration Suite
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444817
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 15:14 EST ---
Better, a few more items:
1. drop
Requires: desktop-file-utils = %{desktop_file_utils_version}
2. don't use /usr/local , should use
/usr/bin/...
/usr/lib/...
instead.
3. install a .desktop file so the app appears in menus.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445537] Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445537 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 15:26 EST --- Is this really intended to replace (real)vnc? (noticed the Obsoletes) -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 436033] Review Request: mona - a solver for the WS1S and WS2S logics
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: mona - a solver for the WS1S and WS2S logics https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=436033 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |CLOSED Resolution||NEXTRELEASE -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445537] Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445537 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 16:24 EST --- Just a notice: I've compared 2 weeks ago the behaviour of vnc (from Centos 5) and tightvnc (version 1.3.9 from rpmforge, still on the same Centos 5). Despite all our efforts (we tried absolutely all available optimization switches, such as-depth 8, -compresslevel 9, -quality 4 ) access via tightvnc to a remote server (which is completely out of my reach; I assume it runs RHEL, no idea about the version ) was painfully slow (delays in the terms of seconds). Using vnc -LowColourLevel 2 brought things closer to normality. RTT were in the 100-110 ms range in all cases. Does this newer version improve things ? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 439100] Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439100 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 16:43 EST --- Here I am! and here are the new SPEC and SRPM: New SPEC URL: http://www.claudiotomasoni.it/files/RPMS/octaviz.spec New SRPM URL: http://www.claudiotomasoni.it/files/RPMS/octaviz-0.4.7-4.fc8.src.rpm The fixes are: - license is GPLv2+ (GPL 2 or later in README) - vtk paths are detected automatically at package compiling time (both /usr/lib/vtk-5.0 and /usr/share/vtkdata-5.0.4 - but I'm still thinking to a more reliable way) - in order to be able to determine the paths, both vtk and vtkdata have been added as build requirements Non fixed: - vtkdata is required only for octaviz-examples, since the most popular functions (vtk_plot, vtk_mesh, vtk_surf, and related) do not need it, while many examples included in the examples subpackage can't run without it. - name not changed in octave-octaviz. I know octaviz is an octave addon, but many people would simply look for octaviz since this is the official name of the project (the name people read in the official site and in ?many? forums or newsgroups dedicated to engineering). Anyway, if someone consider this a blocker, I will change the name (I don't know how to explain it, the name is a sort of placard). Waiting for new comments... -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445594] New: Review Request: geeqie - Image browser and viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445594 Summary: Review Request: geeqie - Image browser and viewer Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/gqview/geeqie.spec SRPM URL: http://mschwendt.fedorapeople.org/gqview/geeqie-1.0-0.3.alpha1.src.rpm Description: Geeqie has been forked from the GQview project with the goal of picking up development and integrating patches. It is an image viewer for browsing through graphics files. Its many features include single click file viewing, support for external editors, previewing images using thumbnails, and zoom. *** This software is currently in alpha state *** The point of adding it to the Fedora package collection is in evaluating it and replacing the old GQview 2.0.4 eventually. GQview unstable development has stalled at 2.1.5 in 2006. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445152] Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445152 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added BugsThisDependsOn||445153 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445153] Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445153 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||445152 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443797] Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Alias: comedilib-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443797 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 17:27 EST --- Hi Lubomir, 1) Fixed. 2) Fixed. 3) It builds fine for me... http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=600026 http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=600033 -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445153] Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445153
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 17:26 EST ---
%dir %{_defaultdocdir}/libacpiis missing in %files list
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445152] Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445152
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 17:35 EST ---
The patch is dangerous. If it were a larger program, there would
be the risk that DESTDIR finds its way into compiled files.
prefix should become /usr, and only the install paths (in the
install Makefile target) should start with DESTDIR.
Requires: ncurses
Drop this. There's an automatic dependency on the ncurses
library SONAME added by rpmbuild. Query the binary rpm to see.
%dir %{_defaultdocdir}/yacpi is missing in %files list.
manual pages are marked as %doc automatically.
CFLAGS still don't include $RPM_OPT_FLAGS.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 248431] Review Request: perl-Net-FTPServer - Secure, extensible and configurable Perl FTP server
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: perl-Net-FTPServer - Secure, extensible and configurable Perl FTP server Alias: perl-Net-FTPServer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=248431 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 17:38 EST --- Here's another try: http://ftp.kspei.com/pub/steve/rpms/perl-Net-FTPServer-1.122-2.src.rpm * Wed May 07 2008 Steven Pritchard [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1.122-2 - Update License tag. - BR uudecode, compress. - Fix a problem with using constants from Archive::Zip (http://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=35698). - Remove both _bindir and _sbindir to be safe. The t/350generatorzip warnings are still there, but I'm working on that (and I reported them in that RT ticket mentioned above). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443797] Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Alias: comedilib-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443797 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 17:46 EST --- Thanks for the fixes marek. I see no more issues with the package; APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445601] New: Review Request: ruby-augeas - Ruby bindings for Augeas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445601 Summary: Review Request: ruby-augeas - Ruby bindings for Augeas Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/spec/ruby-augeas.spec SRPM URL: http://people.redhat.com/dlutter/yum/SRPMS/ruby-augeas-0.1.0-1.src.rpm Description: Ruby bindings for augeas. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445604] Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445604 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added OtherBugsDependingO||177841 nThis|| -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445604] New: Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445604
Summary: Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game
Product: Fedora
Version: rawhide
Platform: All
OS/Version: Linux
Status: NEW
Severity: medium
Priority: low
Component: Package Review
AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Spec URL: http://www.claudiotomasoni.it/files/RPMS/tennix.spec
SRPM URL: http://www.claudiotomasoni.it/files/RPMS/tennix-0.6.1-1.fc8.src.rpm
Description: Tennix! is a top-view 2D tennis game. It features a two-player
game mode and a single-player mode against the computer.
It's a very small and funny game with a nice graphic, music and sounds.
rpmlint is quiet, but...
- the package is compiled with make, since make %{?_smp_mflags} fails
- spec file contains %define debug_package %{nil} in order to avoid an
empty-debuginfo-package error
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445601] Review Request: ruby-augeas - Ruby bindings for Augeas
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ruby-augeas - Ruby bindings for Augeas https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445601 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:12 EST --- rpmlint is clean except for ruby-augeas.x86_64: W: incoherent-version-in-changelog 0.0.1-1 0.1.0-1.fc9 which I will fix before importing into CVS -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 438750] Review Request: qtoctave - fronted for octave written using qt4 widgets
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: qtoctave - fronted for octave written using qt4 widgets https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=438750 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:12 EST --- Hi Mamoru, I've just added a comment (with a new SPEC file and a new SRPM) to the bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439100 and this https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445604 is another review request for a tiny little game named Tennix! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 273701] Review Request: gnome-main-menu - Gnome Main Menu
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: gnome-main-menu - Gnome Main Menu https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=273701 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:11 EST --- I just built it under F9 and it needs NetworkManager-glib-devel in addition to eel2-devel build requirements. Also, it show correctly that my network connection is wireless but it reports I'm connected to (null). -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445537] Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: tightvnc - VNC software https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445537 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:19 EST --- Current TightVNC trunk (and upcomming 1.5 version) is forked RealVNC source with many improvements + bugfixes so behavior should be same as current (Real)vnc. More details are on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TightVNC. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 443797] Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: comedilib - Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Alias: comedilib-review https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443797 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-cvs? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:22 EST --- thank you, New Package CVS Request === Package Name: comedilib Short Description: Data Acquisition library for the Comedi driver Owners: mmahut Branches: EL-5, F-8, F-9 Cvsextras Commits: yes -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445501] Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration
API
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445501
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:30 EST ---
MUST items:
- MUST: rpmlint must be run on every package. The output should be posted
in the review.
OK
- MUST: The package must be named according to the Package Naming
Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The spec file name must match the base package %{name}, in the
format %{name}.spec
OK
- MUST: The package must meet the Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must be licensed with a Fedora approved license and
meet the Licensing Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The License field in the package spec file must match the actual
license.
OK (Though upstream should be encouraged to include a license that
mentions the exceptions)
- MUST: If (and only if) the source package includes the text of the
license(s) in its own file, then that file, containing the text of the
license(s) for the package must be included in %doc.
OK
- MUST: The spec file must be written in American English.
OK
- MUST: The spec file for the package MUST be legible.
OK
- MUST: The sources used to build the package must match the upstream
source, as provided in the spec URL.
OK
- MUST: The package must successfully compile and build into binary rpms
on at least one supported architecture.
OK (checked for i386 and x86_64)
- MUST: All build dependencies must be listed in BuildRequires, except for
any that are listed in the exceptions section of Packaging Guidelines; inclusion
of those as BuildRequires is optional. Apply common sense.
OK
- MUST: The spec file MUST handle locales properly. This is done by using
the %find_lang macro. Using %{_datadir}/locale/* is strictly forbidden.
N/A (no translations)
- MUST: Every binary RPM package which stores shared library files (not
just symlinks) in any of the dynamic linker's default paths, must call ldconfig
in %post and %postun.
N/A
- MUST: A package must own all directories that it creates. If it does not
create a directory that it uses, then it should require a package which does
create that directory. Refer to the Guidelines for examples.
OK
- MUST: A package must not contain any duplicate files in the %files
listing.
OK
- MUST: Permissions on files must be set properly. Executables should be
set with executable permissions, for example. Every %files section must include
a %defattr(...) line.
OK
- MUST: Each package must have a %clean section, which contains rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: Each package must consistently use macros, as described in the
macros section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: The package must contain code, or permissable content. This is
described in detail in the code vs. content section of Packaging Guidelines.
OK
- MUST: Large documentation files should go in a -doc subpackage.
N/A
- MUST: If a package includes something as %doc, it must not affect the
runtime of the application.
OK
- MUST: Header files must be in a -devel package.
N/A
- MUST: Static libraries must be in a -static package.
N/A
- MUST: Packages containing pkgconfig(.pc) files must 'Requires:
pkgconfig' (for directory ownership and usability).
N/A
- MUST: If a package contains library files with a suffix (e.g.
libfoo.so.1.1), then library files that end in .so (without suffix) must go in a
-devel package.
N/A
- MUST: In the vast majority of cases, devel packages must require the
base package using a fully versioned dependency: Requires: %{name} =
%{version}-%{release}
OK
- MUST: Packages must NOT contain any .la libtool archives, these should
be removed in the spec.
OK
- MUST: Packages containing GUI applications must include a
%{name}.desktop file, and that file must be properly installed with
desktop-file-install in the %install section.
N/A
- MUST: Packages must not own files or directories already owned by other
packages.
OK
- MUST: At the beginning of %install, each package MUST run rm -rf
%{buildroot} (or $RPM_BUILD_ROOT).
OK
- MUST: All filenames in rpm packages must be valid UTF-8.
OK
SHOULD Items:
- SHOULD: The description and summary sections in the package spec file
should contain translations for supported Non-English languages, if available.
No translations included
- SHOULD: The reviewer should test that the package builds in mock. See
[Bug 445501] Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445501 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445501] Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: ocaml-augeas - OCaml bindings for Augeas configuration API https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445501 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 18:30 EST --- Summary: - upstream should include an explanation of the LGPL exceptions of the license Other than that, the package is APPROVED -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188445] Review Request: bootconf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bootconf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188445 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445152] Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:17 EST --- Should be all fixed now. Thanks. New Version: New SRPM: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/yacpi-3.0.1-7.fc9.src.rpm SPEC: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/yacpi.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445153] Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445153 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:25 EST --- I have added %dir-directives to libacpi and libacpi-devel rpms New SRPM: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/libacpi-0.2-8.fc9.src.rpm SPEC: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/libacpi.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 444817] Review Request: Spicebird - Collaboration Suite
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: Spicebird - Collaboration Suite https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444817 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:28 EST --- 1. 2. 3. Done New SPEC file: http://www.mediafire.com/?bxtkmcmvdnl New SRPM file: http://www.mediafire.com/?e2gbmnnjmmj New build log: http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/getfile?taskID=600103name=build.log -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445151] Review Request: merkaartor - openstreetmap editor
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: merkaartor - openstreetmap editor https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445151 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:54 EST --- Minor update - preserve timestamps Spec URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/merkaartor.spec SRPM URL: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/merkaartor-0.0.10-3.fc9.src.rpm -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445152] Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: yacpi - ncurses based acpi viewer https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445152 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:51 EST --- The package installed into /usr/share/doc/yacpi instead of yacpi-version until now. The following update fixes this: New SRPM: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/yacpi-3.0.1-8.fc9.src.rpm SPEC: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/yacpi.spec -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445153] Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: libacpi - General purpose library for ACPI
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445153
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 19:53 EST ---
Docs where installed into %{_defaultdocdir}/name instead of name-version
This update fixes this:
New SRPM: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SRPM/libacpi-0.2-9.fc9.src.rpm
SPEC: http://sven.lank.es/Fedora/SPECS/libacpi.spec
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445604] Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.
Summary: Review Request: Tennix! - A funny 2D tennis game
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445604
[EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 20:30 EST ---
You can fix the debuginfo by compiling with the appropriate flags and not
stripping the debug data from the binary at install time:
Add:
sed -i -e 's/install -s/install/' makefile
after %setup -q in %prep to prevent the stripping.
Add:
export CFLAGS=%{optflags}
before make in %build to set the compiler flags.
You're also going to need:
BuildRequires: desktop-file-utils
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.
___
Fedora-package-review mailing list
Fedora-package-review@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188445] Review Request: bootconf
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: bootconf https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188445 --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 21:28 EST --- OK, I found some time to finish this up. Things look mostly good; there are a couple of really minor issues but at the end of my checklist I found one problematic issue. All of the things I found are below: I don't know what's up with the specfile permissions; it's probably a bug in either rpmbuild or rpmlint (since it probably should only complain about weird permissions like 200 or security problems like mode 666). You don't use the dist tag. I assume you don't want to use it and know how to juggle different specs between Fedora branches to preserve the upgrade path. The %description for the -gui package could use a period, I guess. Perhaps consider passing -p to install (both in the spec and in your Makefile) to preserve timestamps. And, the lone significant issue: The desktop file needs to be installed properly with desktop-file-install; see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#desktop for more info. When you do that, things should go OK but you will notice a warning: bootconf.desktop: warning: value Application;System; for key Categories in group Desktop Entry contains a deprecated value Application I don't think that warning is particularly problematic. Sorry for not noticing this earlier. * source files match upstream: 8bda663ecc7aa661200a0b230302b0bc8ca9ce8c20128e9c8fef2775214d9b58 bootconf-1.2.tar.bz2 * package meets naming and versioning guidelines. * specfile is properly named, is cleanly written and uses macros consistently. * summary is OK. * description is OK (-gui package could use a period). * build root is OK. * license field matches the actual license. * license is open source-compatible. * license text included in package. * latest version is being packaged. * BuildRequires are proper. * %clean is present. * package builds in mock (rawhide, x86_64). * package installs properly. * rpmlint has acceptable complaints. * final provides and requires are sane: bootconf-1.2-2.noarch.rpm bootconf = 1.2-2 = /usr/bin/python bootconf-gui-1.2-2.noarch.rpm bootconf-gui = 1.2-2 = /bin/sh bootconf = 0:1.2-2 pygtk2 usermode * %check is not present; not possible to test this automatically. I installed and ran it and it seemed to work OK. * owns the directories it creates. * doesn't own any directories it shouldn't. * no duplicates in %files. * file permissions are appropriate. * scriptlets are OK (update-desktop-database). * code, not content. * documentation is small, so no -doc subpackage is necessary. * %docs are not necessary for the proper functioning of the package. X desktop file not installed properly. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 188542] Review Request: hylafax
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: hylafax https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=188542 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added AssignedTo|[EMAIL PROTECTED]|[EMAIL PROTECTED] Flag||fedora-review? --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 21:52 EST --- Finally getting back to this review; I'll try to get it finished up. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are the QA contact for the bug, or are watching the QA contact. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 439100] Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: octaviz - 3D visualization system for Octave https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=439100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? |fedora-review+ --- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2008-05-07 22:04 EST --- Hi Claudio, The 0.4.7-4 srpm built for me in mock (F8 x86_64) and is working nicely on my laptop. I don't see any blockers here so this package is approved. That leaves the issue of sponsorship. You and Mamoru started working on bug # 438750 before this one so I think its fair that Mamoru gets the first chance to sponsor you. After (or should I say assuming?) that happens, please go ahead and import, build, etc. this package according to the directions at: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers And if you have any questions please feel free to ask! -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445635] New: Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445635 Summary: Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: Package Review AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] QAContact: [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: fedora-package-review@redhat.com,[EMAIL PROTECTED] Spec URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/R-zoo.spec SRPM URL: http://www.cora.nwra.com/~orion/fedora/R-zoo-1.5-1.fc9.src.rpm Description: An S3 class with methods for totally ordered indexed observations. It is particularly aimed at irregular time series of numeric vectors/matrices and factors. zoo's key design goals are independence of a particular index/date/ time class and consistency with with ts and base R by providing methods to extend standard generics. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445635] Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445635 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag|fedora-review? | -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
[Bug 445635] Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations
Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. Summary: Review Request: R-zoo - Z's ordered observations https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=445635 [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What|Removed |Added Flag||fedora-review? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: --- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is. ___ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review
